I see that #Linux and #BSD people have become quite alarmed over the last few days about a new age attestation law in #California and how it may harm #OpenSource #software.
Most of what I'm seeing so far is wild speculation by people who I'm fairly sure are not #lawyers.
Are there any actual #lawyers commenting on this matter? Preferably with some guidance on what all of this really means for #FOSS, and what #app and #OS #developers (FOSS or otherwise) need to do about it.
I did see one message on debian-legal from an actual lawyer: https://lists.debian.org/debian-legal/2026/03/msg00009.html
Is there anything more like that out there?
@argv_minus_one
Well they want to demand age verification in the OS. But from what I've seen the most you've to do is add a disclaimer to your product that it is not to be used in #California. You do not actually need to enforce that or anything.
And that's probably also why so far no lawyer really cared about it,,,
I'm almost completely sure that disclaimer was written by non-lawyers.
Me too, but I didn't talk about the actual text. I just take from the utter lack of interest from actual lawyers in this matter that everyone is cooking it way hotter than it actually is in the end...
The Debian project getting fined $7500 for every under-18 user is pretty hot.
Debian's total budget is something like $10000 as I recall. If two Californian kids run Debian and age attestation isn't implemented to the California attorney general's satisfaction on 2027-01-01, Debian ceases to exist.
And I first installed Debian when I was about 15 years old and (at the time) living in California. I'd be shocked if there aren't at least two other Californian kids running it right now.
well but how will they go about enforcing that if you're not in california nor plan on going there.
So many things are still unclear that it probably is almost impossible to say anything with certainty right now I guess.
@argv_minus_one Oh and what'll happen to microsoft if two californian kids are running a version of windows without it?
It's just stupid all way round.
I don't know. That's why I was hoping to hear commentary from actual lawyers.
I've worked together with compliance (and legal people) for long enough to give you the following spoiler of how they operate. They read the text + the commentary provided by one of the big publishing companies on the law (which is quite expensive but libraries usually have these books too).
And then as it's the US you've to look at what courts ruled on previously as these rulings become basically binding for future rulings.
So they'll most certainly wait until then...
I see. I take it no such commentary has been published yet?
B.Blalock
ARGVMI~1.PIF
Klaus Frank